What would you do: team bike or replica?

[DaveB1]

If you had the choice between the following bikes, which one would you opt for and why?

Bike 1 is the genuine article, a team issued bike, used on the pro circuit in the early 90's (granted, as a spare, but still). However, it's well used/worn (as many team bikes are), and was ridden by, how else to put it... a popular but tainted rider on a popular but tainted team. To boot, it's being sold by what can best be described as a recalcitrant seller, who will not entertain anything other than an in-person transaction. In itself not an issue, were it not I'm 200+ miles north of this seller, and do not own a car.

Bike 2 is essentially the same frame; same manufacturer, same tube set, but in a different (equally attractive) non-stigmatized paint scheme, much better condition, by and large the same groupset, but without the 'pro' cool factor. Available from a seller willing to ship.

Personally, I'm torn. I love the notion of "the real thing" - provenance is impossible to manufacture, after all. But, I find myself conflicted about both the seller (dealing with attitude is rarely worth any price to me) and the fact that the pro who rode this bike is among "the shamed".

So, while I know these are ultimately personal decisions, what would you do?

 

[GuyWood]

Personally? if bike one belonged to a cheat, I'd go bike two. If the owner of bike one has been 'shamed' I think the cachet of said bike is pretty much null and void .

 

[Joe of Loath]

To ride or to hang on the wall?

Former, bike 2. Latter, bike 1.

 

[rienster]

I think we have to realise that most guys around that time were doing the same thing. Some of them have just been complete jerks about it, and come out as bigger losers in the end.
As a result I love guys like Virenque and Vino. But can't stand the man were talking about here. That makes that the bike youre talking about here has no extra value for me. But if it does for you, go for it.

 

[The History Man]

What do you want, a historical artefact or a regular bicycle? Forget seller, cheats etc I own ww1 artefacts such as a used bayonet. To some its use and purpose could be considered far more distasteful than a bicycle ridden by a 'cheat'. But I value it as an artefact. You would get the bonus of riding/connecting with something historic or just another nice bike.

Your choice but I think you can guess my view.

 

[DaveB1]

This is good stuff... And a solid reminder that I'm after a bike I can ride, not one that's just an wall hanger.

 

[The History Man]

Out of interest, who are we talking about here?

 

[FINNEY1973]

Team bike all day long, tainted rider or not. I'd love one - braze on race number hanger, perfect geometry, made by the best frame-builder. It's the reason they make the copies for general sale in the first place - your not supposed to have a pro's bike! I'd buy a book, get a train ticket, take a 200 mile trip and hand your monies over.

 

[Robbied196]

I'd go bike 2, no one needs a shamed bike! I actually bid on a couple of Jimmy Savile's old bikes, I'm really pleased I didn't win one now

 

[lewisfoto]

Since I am both a collector and a rider I would buy the team bike because in time it will be worth more, as long as you have some type of verification of its provenance. That said if it were going to be my only road bike I would go for the nicer non-team bike.

Steven